Re: [c-nsp] C6K, SUP720, 12.2(33)SXI, CoPP, glean

2009-11-14 Thread John.Herbert
Ok, so apologies if I'm repeating things you know very well already... Hardware CoPP for CEF Glean is disabled by default, so assuming you have enabled hardware CoPP, if you chose to enable glean rate-limiting (with the mls rate-limit unicast cef glean pps burst command) then presumably you

[c-nsp] SRC5, And The BFD Bug Remains :-( - *sigh*

2009-11-14 Thread Mark Tinka
So after chasing this thing since SRC, and having gone through all the various rebuilds until now, I'm not proud to say that the evil BFD + watchdog nmi timeout bug persists. It wasn't but just a day ago that an NPE-G1 we upgraded to SRC5, and on which we enabled BFD in the hopes that that bug

Re: [c-nsp] SRC5, And The BFD Bug Remains :-( - *sigh*

2009-11-14 Thread Daniel Roesen
On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 02:35:59AM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote: What quality networking, we have these days... I think it's called Carrier grade these days... Best regards, Daniel -- CLUE-RIPE -- Jabber: d...@cluenet.de -- d...@ircnet -- PGP: 0xA85C8AA0

Re: [c-nsp] SRC5, And The BFD Bug Remains :-( - *sigh*

2009-11-14 Thread Gert Doering
Hi, On Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 02:35:59AM +0800, Mark Tinka wrote: What quality networking, we have these days... Hey, at least you *have* BFD. Unlike us folks with SXH and SXI that want to use BFD on SVI interfaces... gert -- USENET is *not* the non-clickable part of WWW!

Re: [c-nsp] C6K, SUP720, 12.2(33)SXI, CoPP, glean

2009-11-14 Thread Phil Mayers
I'm a bit confused about what you're trying to say here. The mls glean rate limiter is completley different to copp. The op's problem, and one i have observed too, is that copp is applied to all cpu traffic, including the original packet which was punted to glean. IMHO, and tac have advised me

Re: [c-nsp] C6K, SUP720, 12.2(33)SXI, CoPP, glean

2009-11-14 Thread John.Herbert
Ah I see - I misunderstood the issue being described. Appreciate the clarification, and I stand corrected. j. From: Phil Mayers [p.may...@imperial.ac.uk] Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2009 17:24 To: Herbert, John Cc: tdur...@gmail.com;

[c-nsp] 3550 High CPU - nothing in proc cpu

2009-11-14 Thread Hector Herrera
During a high network usage event, the cpu load increased to 90% sustained, while a 'show processes cpu' did not reveal any culprits. I suspected IP Input may be consuming a high amount of cpu, but it was only at 2.7% The 3550 is working as a L3 router with two static entries for the default gw

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 High CPU - nothing in proc cpu

2009-11-14 Thread Harald Firing Karlsen
Hector Herrera wrote: During a high network usage event, the cpu load increased to 90% sustained, while a 'show processes cpu' did not reveal any culprits. I suspected IP Input may be consuming a high amount of cpu, but it was only at 2.7% The 3550 is working as a L3 router with two static

Re: [c-nsp] 3550 High CPU - nothing in proc cpu

2009-11-14 Thread Hector Herrera
Thank you for your responses. I collected the commands to run the next time the cpu utilization spikes. I did manage to capture the output of 'show cef not-cef-switched' and it shows a very large number under the unsupported column. All the other columns are zero. Reading on the list archives